Steve Nash really should have won multiple championships.

[og15]

Anyone winning multiple championships means someone else isn't winning. What champs should Nash's teams have been displacing?

Championships don't happen in a vacuum.

So OP, which years should he have won? How many championships exactly or is this just a vague throw it into the air. If you give us that, we can discuss something. There's usually reasons why teams that "should" win don't win.

[JustBuzzin]

Please don't come here to start drama.

Also you got other people in this thread calling him overrated. Obviously I'm not the only one questioning him. Great player, but I expect a 2x MVP to win at least one championship with the talented teams he played for.

You are the one to overdramatize.

And why should I care for other people seeing Nash the same way as you do? Do you think you're the only one to overestimate the impact of a single player in terms of leading a team to titles while ignoring facts (just as injuries to teammates. Or having these teammates at his side outside of their prime)? Or confusing a regular season award with the outcome of his teams in the playoffs? Or seemingly not understanding this team sports at all?

Again: Do you really want to discuss? I guess not as all answers had been given to you multiple times before. You prefer to ignore them to hold up your agenda. So what is the purpose of this thread other than confirmation of your opinion that you carved into your stone and don't want to see changed?

Bro if you don't like my post put me on your ignore list.

You can't come into my threads and start unnecessary drama because I mentioned something in the past. The sad part is I don't even know you, but you seem to know everything I post. Grow up man. If you don't like my threads then just stop responding.

[JustBuzzin]

Anyone winning multiple championships means someone else isn't winning. What champs should Nash's teams have been displacing?

Championships don't happen in a vacuum.

So OP, which years should he have won? How many championships exactly or is this just a vague throw it into the air. If you give us that, we can discuss something. There's usually reasons why teams that "should" win don't win.

He should have won with either of those teams. You telling me Nash/Joe/Marion/Amare shouldn't have won a championship?

The Lakers were the favorites before the season when they had Nash/Kobe/Pau/Dwight. They choked.

At what point do we hold the 2x MVP accountable?

It's like certain players can only get hate. Nash is no different than KD. Just because he's nice doesn't mean I should treat him any different than I do KD for his failed attempts at a championship with talented teams.

[AlexanderRight]

Can’t really blame him for losing to Duncan, Kobe, and Dirk. All players that nobody thinks he’s better than. Yeah, he did lose to the Kings I think a couple times in his Dallas days, but that early 2000 Sac squad was legit.

[Kent]

If you watched him during that era, it was easy to see that he was a game-changer who made those around him better.

Judging him purely on Finals appearances and championships is fruitless. That's like saying Barkley was overrated for the same reason when most probably agree Chuck deserves the praise he gets.

If Luka never makes a Finals, will you say he will be overrated too?

[nikster]

Anyone winning multiple championships means someone else isn't winning. What champs should Nash's teams have been displacing?

Championships don't happen in a vacuum.

So OP, which years should he have won? How many championships exactly or is this just a vague throw it into the air. If you give us that, we can discuss something. There's usually reasons why teams that "should" win don't win.

He should have won with either of those teams. You telling me Nash/Joe/Marion/Amare shouldn't have won a championship?

The Lakers were the favorites before the season when they had Nash/Kobe/Pau/Dwight. They choked.

At what point do we hold the 2x MVP accountable?

It's like certain players can only get hate. Nash is no different than KD. Just because he's nice doesn't mean I should treat him any different than I do KD for his failed attempts at a championship with talented teams.

Which year should have he won in Phoenix?

The injured 38 year old who didn't even make an all star or All NBA team should have led his team to a title?

[Masigond]

You can't come into my threads and start unnecessary drama because I mentioned something in the past. The sad part is I don't even know you, but you seem to know everything I post. Grow up man. If you don't like my threads then just stop responding.

Oh, I can do that very much. At least as long as the moderators think that it's OK. As long as you ignore facts and other takes and make the same allegations multiple times, you'll have to live with users like me reacting. This is a discussion board, or isn't it? So let's finally discuss. Make arguments, and respect answers when people don't agree with you. Somehow you tend to disappear when others give facts or ask for reasoning, only to re-emerge a couple of posts later to make the same unproven claims. Take a look at the respective seasons and the injuries and say in what year Nash should have won. And another hint: Look at Nash's stats and say if he really didn't do enough.

Somehow it seems that you are not that comfortable with your own opinion that Nash did not deserve to be a two-time MVP? Or why do you demand that much confirmation over and over again?

[dWadeOwnzYou]

I don't think he's overrated. He just happens to be in the Tim Duncan era, which his team could never get pass the Spurs...an all time one of the greatest team ever build. I remember him being very clutch in the regular season, helping the Mavs and Suns to consistently win 55+ games year after year.

I rather consider him to be the most unlucky all-star player of all time. He couldn't win a championship with those stacked team, as a player and as a coach. That's ashamed, he seems like a likeable dude on and off the court.

[beeshma]

The Suns were notoriously cheap during the Nash years. They traded 1st round picks in multiple seasons for $3 million dollars each. The Suns could have drafted Luol Deng but chose to trade the pick to the Bulls for $3 million. Also, as has been pointed out, they let Joe Johnson walk when he was a top 20 player in the league. I believe that if the Suns had invested to build a team around Nash then they could have won a title in that era of the mid-2000's.

[tamaraw08]

Amare is arguable the worst defensive C of all-time. It's a miracle Nash managed to win anything at all playing with him. He had Joe Johnson for one season, before he was a star. Marion was the only player worth a damn, and they traded him for a broken down Shaq.

In 03-04, Dallas coach put Dirk as Center where they just ranked 26th in the league in DRTG.
The year before that, the tallest player next to Dirk that played the most mins was Raef LaFrentz who just logged 23 mins/game. He collected just under 5 rebs/game.

[Kurtz]

Nash didn't win a ring because in the pivotal Spurs series he got his nose broken by Tony Parker and then got hip checked by Robert Horry leading to key suspensions.

Spurs had some dirty ass teams back in the day but it was effective.

[advent11]

Would've won one in 03 had Dirk not gone down in the Western Conference Finals and the Mavs not went coward and decided to play it safe.

[Masigond]

Anyone winning multiple championships means someone else isn't winning. What champs should Nash's teams have been displacing?

Championships don't happen in a vacuum.

So OP, which years should he have won? How many championships exactly or is this just a vague throw it into the air. If you give us that, we can discuss something. There's usually reasons why teams that "should" win don't win.

2002 (DAL): Lost in the Western Conference Semifinals against the Kings who were clearly the better team

2003 (DAL): Lost in the Western Conference Finals against the eventual champions (Spurs) with Nowitzki being injured and missing the last 3 games of that series

2004 (DAL): After Dirk's injury Cuban messed up the team and traded for Walker and Jamison. The outcome: A more talented team on paper that did not fit that well. Lost in the first round against a better Kings team.

2005 (PHO): Made a team that missed the playoffs in the season before win 62 games. Lost against the eventual champions (Spurs) who were by no means the weaker team (higher SRS in the regular season despite winning "only" 59 games) as the Suns were playing essentially only 7 players. Nash was averaging 23 / 10.5 but the Spurs prevailed 4-1.

2006 (PHO): Lost against the Mavericks in the Western Conference Finals with Stoudemire missing almost the whole regular season and all of the playoffs due to injury. And Joe Johnson wasn't with the team anymore...

2007 (PHO): Lost against the eventual champions (Spurs) in the Western Conference Semifinals. Should they have won? The Spurs were great with their top three players in their prime (or near their prime). And there were these suspensions to Stoudemire and Diaw...

2008 (PHO): As had been said, the Suns had traded Marion for a declining and somewhat ill-fitting Shaq (who was far removed from being the volume scorer he had been several years before). First round exit against a better Spurs team.

2009 (PHO): Rebuilding year, new coaches, winning 46 wins but missing the playoffs.

2010 (PHO): A healthy season, reaching the Western Conference Finals only to lose against a better Lakers team

2011 & 2012 (PHO): Stoudemire gone (for a second-round draft pick...), and the team lacked talent to make much of a fuzz. Missed the playoffs in both years. Nash was 36 and 37 years old respectively, just to remember.

After that: Nash's body was broken down, so why even mentioning that he played with Dwight and Kobe? Actually he only managed to play 65 games over two seasons with them before retiring. Furthermore Kobe had his own injury issues in Nash's last season.

Those are facts. Not that "he played with A, B, C, so he should have won" BS without regarding the competition, opponents and circumstances.

[ShootersShoot]

I hate when people bring up that lakers team...Yea, they werent a great RS team, but were on a hot streak before they lost Kobe for the season before the playoffs even started. After losing kobe, of course they werent going to do anything.

[Roger Murdock]

He couldn’t defend Tony Parker and was a defensive liability overall. In none of his most important playoff series was he the best player on the court.

On top of that the Suns lit resources on fire to save money, selling valuable draft picks for petty cash so the team had less room for error.

I think he spent about 6-7 years on title caliber teams yet failed to make the finals.

2003 - would have beaten the Nets but lost in WCF to Spurs, had a mediocre series

2005 - lost to spurs, would have been favored vs Pistons

2006 - lost to Mavericks, may have been favored vs Heat. Struggled in series.

2007 - lost to Spurs in semis, would have be huge favorites vs Jazz and Cavs to win it all

2010 - lost to Lakers in WCF, would have been a toss up series vs Magic

That’s several years as strong contenders. He never had that ‘put the team in my back and carry’ series that title teams have

[og15]

Anyone winning multiple championships means someone else isn't winning. What champs should Nash's teams have been displacing?

Championships don't happen in a vacuum.

So OP, which years should he have won? How many championships exactly or is this just a vague throw it into the air. If you give us that, we can discuss something. There's usually reasons why teams that "should" win don't win.

He should have won with either of those teams. You telling me Nash/Joe/Marion/Amare shouldn't have won a championship?

The Lakers were the favorites before the season when they had Nash/Kobe/Pau/Dwight. They choked.

At what point do we hold the 2x MVP accountable?

It's like certain players can only get hate. Nash is no different than KD. Just because he's nice doesn't mean I should treat him any different than I do KD for his failed attempts at a championship with talented teams.

Should have won? What do you mean by should? Should suggests the team is dominant and far above everyone.

Why mention the Lakers? Nash was 38, no longer a star and their success didn't rely on him.

The 04-05 Suns were not even considered a top contender to start the season. Nash/Joe/Marion and Amare had one season together, they lost to a team with Duncan/Manu/Parker. Johnson played 3 games due to injury. The Spurs had been together for years, it was the Suns first season together.

I'm not sure why these are the two examples you chose.

[aminiaturebuddha]

You telling me Nash/Joe/Marion/Amare shouldn't have won a championship?

That was only one year they were together. And Nash took those same three guys from a 29-win team the year before to a 62-win team. They lost in the playoffs to the eventual champion Spurs. You know who else lost to the Spurs in their first year together? The Lebron-led Heat. Those Spurs teams were good.

There are very few teams that win it all after being thrown together for one year. The 2008 Celtics and the 1983 Sixers are the only two teams to ever win it all the year they added the best player on their team in trade or free agency. It certainly shouldn't have been the expectation that the Suns would win that year based upon basketball history.

[OdomFan]

One man stood in his way more often than not. Tim Duncan. Its as simple as that. I find it really ridiculous and funny when people call someone overrated. Nash worked hard to earn the rating he has. I used to hate that he won those MVPs over Kobe in 06, and Shaq in 05, but all the hate he gets and little respect in all time greatest point guard topics made me change sides. Nash deserves everything he accomplished.

Still would take Kidd over him any day of the week though.

[tcheco]

Someone has an agenda trying to list their teammates as PROOF that if he was good enough he should have won a chip. Zero content on the OP to actually support any claim. It's laughable really. Listing the LAKERS AS A EVIDENCE? Grow up.

Nash was added to the suns team and improved an bottom of the league team to contenders. That team couldn't rebound even if their lives depended on, and Amare was great offensively but was terrible on defense, and playing against prime Duncan, Shaq, Dirk that is the worst matchup possible. Nash failed to win a tittle .

He lost to the Spurs of David Robinson(1998) and Duncan(2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2008), Kobe and Gasol(2010), Dirk(2006), Peja and Webber(2002, 2004)

You could argue that maybe he and Dirk could/should have beaten the 2002 Kings(that lost to the lakers in OT of a game seven of the WCF). The rest? Losing to 2 of the best dinasties in the history of the game + losing to dirk without having Amare?

Some players just have bad luck. Injuries got in the way a few years, suspensions in another. He deserved the 2 MVPs he got, he was the most important player in those team, he just ran into two top 10 players of all time and one top 20.

"should have won multiple championships", just a casual or hater would look at history and think like this, or maybe a 10 year old.

[Kingdibs19]

It’s crazy how many excuses RealGM posters will make for Nash. Never see this for any other player. For Lebron, Kobe and MJ it’s how they wouldn’t have won if not saved by Ray Allen, Kyrie, Fisher, Shaq, Pippen, Phil Jackson etc. But for Nash it’s every excuse for every year and moving goal posts for why he deserved those 2 ridiculous MVPs. He was a good passer, very poor man’s Steph on offensive and a turnstile on Defence. He would be relentlessly targeted in today’s NBA, so he was lucky to be in that era. He just was never good enough to win due to his shortcomings.